• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Who are the neutrals supporting in the final?

Who are the neutrals supporting in the final?

  • Total voters
    68
  • Poll closed .
Himannv

Himannv

Hall of Fame Member
Ashes81 said:
The England football manager is one of the most difficult coaching jobs in sport.

Past managers have been not just criticised but mocked and ridiculed in the media.

Even our most successful manager, Sir Alf, was hounded out in near disgrace after we failed to qualify in 1974. We lost out to Poland who went on to finish 3rd.

Managers like Taylor - immortalised as a turnip in the press, and McClaren, the wally with the brolly, never recovered.

Its a brutal job to take.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's true. The coaches who take on these jobs aren't necessarily the very best out there and they're generally coaches who haven't quite mastered club football. I mean the likes of Pep or Klopp will probably do well given how good they are at identifying the right players for the roles and how clear they are on what they want to do on the pitch.

Club football is the more difficult assignment considering the possible lack of resources and the level of competition. The main hurdle that a national team manager would have to overcome is the lack of opportunities to build continuity. In all other aspects, I think they actually have some advantages over club football.
 
Himannv

Himannv

Hall of Fame Member
Molehill said:
Ok, never heard them called that before, but I was only 10 at the time.

I think the key point is the last one. When there are a few teams who are much of a muchness, why is it always the same ones who find themselves in the Final?
Click to expand...
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Himannv said:
I don't think that's true. The coaches who take on these jobs aren't necessarily the very best out there and they're generally coaches who haven't quite mastered club football. I mean the likes of Pep or Klopp will probably do well given how good they are at identifying the right players for the roles and how clear they are on what they want to do on the pitch.

Club football is the more difficult assignment considering the possible lack of resources and the level of competition. The main hurdle that a national team manager would have to overcome is the lack of opportunities to build continuity. In all other aspects, I think they actually have some advantages over club football.
Click to expand...
All of what you say is true but it ignores the fact that being England football manager is the most scrutinised job I. English football. It can ruin you. You’re more susceptible to abuse and media instruction than pretty much anyone, possibly including the Prime Minister.
 
Himannv

Himannv

Hall of Fame Member
GIMH said:
All of what you say is true but it ignores the fact that being England football manager is the most scrutinised job
Click to expand...
That's only the case when there are actual games on, and I think you'll agree that games are few and far between. Clubs have games on every week and for bigger clubs, each game is scrutinized intensely, especially if you're not winning. On top of that, you have off the field issues associated with corrupt owners, player power, player behaviour, finances, illegal dealings, points deduction (heh), and numerous pundits taking constant shots at your team and management skills. Especially when you're not winning. Managers lose their jobs far more frequently than it will ever happen in national team football. I'm not saying there is no scrutiny - that is, of course, part of the job. However, it's still not at the level of club football.
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Himannv said:
That's only the case when there are actual games on, and I think you'll agree that games are few and far between. Clubs have games on every week and for bigger clubs, each game is scrutinized intensely, especially if you're not winning. On top of that, you have off the field issues associated with corrupt owners, player power, player behaviour, finances, illegal dealings, points deduction (heh), and numerous pundits taking constant shots at your team and management skills. Especially when you're not winning. Managers lose their jobs far more frequently than it will ever happen in national team football. I'm not saying there is no scrutiny - that is, of course, part of the job. However, it's still not at the level of club football.
Click to expand...
Purely football wise I agree club management is harder. But the external factors make the England job harder IMO. We’ve even had managers chased out of the job just before they signed ffs.
 
L

loterry1994

International Debutant
England in football have always been kind of over hyped to be better than they are actually are I think. The big reason why their golden generation under achieved is because even a lot of them will admit they had good players individually but they never really worked well as a team. I’ve seen interviews before from guys like Ferdinand, Gary Neville, John terry etc. They had some hatred for each other during their time playing in the premier league and when it came to playing for England they couldn’t put their differences aside for that jersey. You compare that with a team like Spain for example where it gets heated with players from the Spanish league especially between Real Madrid and Barcelona players from last decades but they can still work well together for Spain.

Now Englands team the last 4-5 years don’t have the greatest players out there. But I think they’re a better team than a lot of past England teams mainly cause they are all on the same page and currently has a manager that backs them. You see a lot of players out of form playing in their leagues but when they turn up for England they play some their best football
 
L

loterry1994

International Debutant
Fuller Pilch said:
What?
WT20 is a bit of a joke. Other way around.
Click to expand...
honestly think theyre about the same right now . WTC is yet that prestigious and I don’t think is that fair at all. You got teams playing less games than a lot the other teams. You don’t have to be great away from home and can dominate at home and make a final then win it. I’ve said it before I think a lot of teams would rather win a big test series away from home in like England, Australia, India etc which rarely happens
 
BazBall21

BazBall21

International Captain
Australia for me.

Better comedy if India lose and it's not like England are ever competing with the Australian volume of success.

Would be sad for Kohli though. That ICC trophy eluding him yet again.
 
BazBall21

BazBall21

International Captain
Can't begrudge either winner tomorrow. India have obviously smashed it and Australia have responded very well to the bad start. 9/9 if they win tomorrow, toppling the juggernaut hosts in the final. Can't argue with that. Nothing like the toss WT20 in 2021 where they got rather lucky.
 
Bahnz

Bahnz

Hall of Fame Member
One part of me wants India to win by a massive margin, both to confirm their status as the most dominant world cup team not all time and to provide me with the solace of NZ being the only team that came within a country mile of beating them.

The more malicious part of me wants Australia to win because it would just be very very funny.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top